home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!news.dell.com!natinst.com!natinst.com!not-for-mail
- From: glens@natinst.com (Glen Sescila)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st.tech
- Subject: Re: 16-bit RAM Access on Falcon ?
- Date: 9 Nov 1992 10:09:20 -0600
- Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
- Lines: 25
- Distribution: eunet
- Message-ID: <1dm2fgINN3l3@falcon.natinst.com>
- References: <1992Nov1.183817.15596@rhrk.uni-kl.de> <1992Nov5.213100.423@prime.mdata.fi> <1992Nov8.132805.1903@rhrk.uni-kl.de>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: falcon.natinst.com
-
- In article <1992Nov8.132805.1903@rhrk.uni-kl.de> peter@rhrk.uni-kl.de (Gunter Bitz) writes:
-
- >I don't know what Qindex does, but I testet the following:
- >A short loop (which fits completely in the processor cache) like that:
- >ll:
- > move.w d0,(a0)+
- > dbf d7,ll
- >and another like
- >ll:
- > move.l d0,(a0)+
- > dbf d7,ll
- >
- >The result was that filling the same amount of memory with longwords is a bit
- >faster than filling with words, but not twice as fast as it should be on a
- >r e a l 32 bit machine. I'm sorry about that
-
- Are you sure your data started on a longword boundry? If it wasn't,
- that would explain why it was not twice as fast.
-
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- "Now You're Playing With Power Without The Price!" Glen Sescila |||
- / | \
- My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer and probably are
- exact opposites. InterNet: glens@natinst.com
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-